Текст книги "ГУЛаг Палестины"

Автор книги: Лев Гунин

сообщить о нарушении

Текущая страница: 67 (всего у книги 88 страниц)

and the first to publish a Jewish newspaper (1989). A Center for the Study of

Jewish History is functioning in the city. Two Jewish-Ukrainian conferences have

been held here. We have a Jewish ensemble, a Jewish theater, a philharmonic

orchestra which recently, at the opening of the season, performed the works of

Tchaikovsky and of two Jewish composers. A Jew, Kotlyk, head of the Jewish Society,

was elected as a member of the City Council.

Two years ago, in the center of the city, not far from "Hitler Square," a monument

dedicated to the victims of the Lviv ghetto was unveiled. This is the biggest and

most prominent Jewish memorial in all of Europe. Haven't you seen it?

As head of the Jewish Council, I was present at all the events that I am describing,

and I can document them. Your discussing these events in a future broadcast would

present a wonderful balance which together with your video footage would paint an

accurate picture of Jewish life in Ukraine, and not a deliberately one-sided one.

One cannot indict any nation on the grounds that a few of its members were evil.

Evil individuals exist in every nation. But why didn't you show those Ukrainians

and Poles who rescued Jews? There are many of them. Initially, we ourselves didn't

know about them, as they remained silent, and our former regime forbade them to

speak on such topics. In Lviv, Simon Wiesenthal himself was rescued from death, and

in Boryslav, the head of the Israeli parliament, Shevakh Weiss, with whom in 1992 I

personally visited his own rescuers.

We have a list of almost 2,500 Ukrainians who rescued Jews, and many of these are

precisely from the Western region. We have brought these rescuers to Israel,

presented them with certificates, and are now supporting them with pensions. We are

presently in the process of submitting this list of rescuers to the Holocaust Museum

in Washington. Concerning this I have been making particular arrangements, as I

will be in the United States later this year.

You broadcast that Lviv is being depopulated of Jews. However, this has been

happening throughout the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), and began not

recently, but even during the Bolshevik regime – but nobody is blaming this on

anti-Semitism. Rather, other motives are responsible: economics, Chornobyl, the

reunification of families. Anti-Semitism plays a far weaker role. Our Council

interviews Jewish emigrants and has definitive information on this question.

Jews, perhaps more than others, should avoid throwing blanket insults and

accusations at other peoples because they themselves – as a people and not as

individuals – have been blamed by the Fascists for all sins. Why do you, then,

proclaim all Ukrainians to be genetic anti-Semites? Why, in addition to talking

about the police did you not also talk about the rescuers of Jews, did not show a

single one of them? And in Lviv, there are many of them. Is it that you couldn't

find any, or that you didn't want to look?

I wish to declare to you officially: in the new Ukraine, there is no state-sponsored

anti-Semitism. Not long ago, a Jew fulfilled the obligations of the prime minister

of Ukraine. The mayors of Odessa and Vynnytsia are Jews. The mayor of Cherkasy was

a Jew. There are six Jews in parliament. Some Deputy Ministers are Jews. It is

such outstanding facts as these that convey the predominant attitude of Ukrainians

to Jewish rebirth, to Jewish culture.

Among the CIS, Ukraine was the first to hold a Jewish Congress. The Days of Jewish

Culture were celebrated this year as a National holiday, dedicated to the 135th

anniversary of Shalom Aleichem. In Ukraine, there are active Jewish organisations

in 89 cities. Eleven Jewish newspapers are published. Ten schools are in

operation. Jewish groups have been formed within Pedagogical and Theatrical

Institutes (composed of 80% Ukrainians who have mastered Hebrew). We have held a

festival of children's vocal and dance ensembles in which 46 groups applied to

participate. Ukrainian television broadcasts two Jewish programs. Jewish

spectacles are performed on the stages of Ukraine.

For the fifth year now we have honored the victims of Babyn Yar, where there has

been erected the Jewish monument "Menorah," and at which have been placed wreaths

both from the President of Ukraine and from the Kyiv City Council. Just this year,

the Days of Babyn Yar commemorations were conducted over the period of an entire

week. In all cities (in all!) in which Jews were shot during the War, annual

remembrance days are observed.

All this you failed to see, and so you did great harm not only to Ukrainians, but to

Jews as well.

In our work of resurrecting Jewish life, we receive help from such prominent

Ukrainian intellectuals and parliamentarians as B. Oliynyk, P. Osadchuk, O. Yemets,

D. Pavlychko, V. Yavorivskyi, I. Drach, P. Movchan, M. Shulha, I. Dziuba, V.

Durdynets, and many others. We do not want to return to former times, and yet that

is the direction in which your broadcast is pushing us. You have done as the

Bolsheviks used to do – you presented information that is one-sided, suppressed

information that does not fit your stereotype, biased the selection of materials,

strengthened and reinforced negativism. It would be as if the Los Angeles riots

were shown to us here as representative American events.

If you want to convince yourselves that everything I have been saying is true,

please come to us and film anything you want. Please regard this as an official

invitation of our Jewish Council.

Certainly there exist many disappointments in our work. A lot remains to be done in

revitalizing Jewish culture. We cannot immediately realize all our goals. But this

is never merely because we are Jews; it is never attributable to either

state-sponsored or spontaneous anti-Semitism. You must be aware in what a difficult

economic situation Ukraine finds itself – and yet despite this, the government gives

high priority to the support of cultural diversity, included in which is the support

of Jewish culture. For example, the observance of the Days of Jewish Culture in

Ukraine was funded entirely by the Ukrainian government – close to two billion

karbovantsi, and this in our difficult economic times!

It is these many things, then, that are of importance to us, and not the activities

of individual ultra-nationalists who don't receive support from most Ukrainians;

where in fact most Ukrainians condemn their activities.

Oh, democracy! Is there any country, even the United States, which has succeeded in

ridding itself of anti-Semitism? And are the American anti-Semites representative

of official government attitudes toward Jews? Or are isolated events in Los Angeles

reflective of United States government attitudes toward Blacks?

Esteemed gentlemen! You didn't do a good thing insulting the Ukrainian people.

Imagine if someone collected similarly true but unrepresentative facts to paint a

negative picture of the Jewish people. Remember the Biblical injunction: Don't do

anything to another that you would not want done to yourself.

Please revisit us with an open mind, and not with any fixed bias. The United States

is presently awaiting the visit of our President, and we don't want his visit to be

marred by any anti-Ukrainian actions from anybody, especially not from Jews; nor

would we want American assistance to our country to depend on isolated individuals

who are opposed to granting such assistance.

We await you in Ukraine.

Respectfully,

I.M. Levitas

Head of the Jewish Council of Ukraine

Head of the Nationalities Associations of Ukraine

HOME DISINFORMATION PEOPLE JORDAN 726 hits since 23May98

Jordan Letter 5 Jul 18/96 Genetic anti-Semitism

July 18, 1996

Michael H. Jordan

Chairman, Westinghouse Electric Corporation

11 Stanwix Street

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

USA 15222

Dear Mr. Jordan:

I have some questions for Morley Safer, and I route them to him through you, as I have discovered over the years

that he is not very communicative when addressed directly – perhaps if the request to respond to these questions came

from you, he might be more forthcoming. Specifically, I wonder if you would be so good as to ask Mr. Safer the

questions organized under the following eight points, all of them in connection with his October 23, 1994 statement

that "The Church and Government of Ukraine have tried to ease people's fears, suggesting that ... Ukrainians, despite

the allegations, are not genetically anti-Semitic.":

(1) Through what source did Mr. Safer become aware of the allegation that Ukrainians were genetically

anti-Semitic? And what were the qualifications of this source in the field of human genetics, particularly in the

field of the genetic inheritance of cognitive predispositions?

(2) Before broadcasting this allegation, did Mr. Safer verify its plausibility with any responsible geneticist?

(3) What does Mr. Safer mean by "the church of Ukraine"? This reference is as puzzling as would be a reference

to "the church of the United States."

(4) Could Mr. Safer divulge the name of the church representative who issued this denial of a genetic

predisposition to anti-Semitism on the part of Ukrainians, and indicate as well the time and the place of the denial?

(5) Could Mr. Safer similarly identify the Government of Ukraine representative who issued this same denial of a

genetic predisposition to anti-Semitism on the part of Ukrainians – who was it, when, where?

(6) Is Mr. Safer aware of a genetic predisposition to anti-Semitism on the part of any other group – or is this

in his estimation a uniquely Ukrainian phenomenon?

(7) Has Mr. Safer considered the possibility that his own antipathy toward Ukrainians is genetically based? If

not, then how would he account for it? And if not, would Mr. Safer be willing to issue a public statement to the

effect that his anti-Ukrainianism is not genetic in origin?

(8) Could Mr. Safer comment on the possibility that the refusal of CBS personnel to discuss "The Ugly Face of

Freedom" might similarly be genetically-based? If CBS personnel reject the notion that their corporate decisions are

genetically influenced, then could Mr. Safer persuade them to issue a joint statement to this effect, and in

particular denying that they are genetically anti-Ukrainian?

These few and simple questions, it seems to me, serve the useful purpose of establishing what category Mr.

Safer's statement falls into: that of a responsible journalist who picks his words carefully and later stands by them,

or that of a bigot who gets up in front of the camera and begins to ramble off the top of his head – and later selects

muteness as the optimal defense for his irresponsibility.

Sincerely yours,

Lubomyr Prytulak

cc: Ed Bradley, Steve Kroft, Morley Safer, Lesley Stahl, Mike Wallace

HOME DISINFORMATION PEOPLE JORDAN

HOME DISINFORMATION PEOPLE JORDAN 1473 hits since 23May98

Jordan Letter 6 Jul 19/96 Allowing a fabulist on 60 Minutes

July 19, 1996

Michael H. Jordan

Chairman, Westinghouse Electric Corporation

11 Stanwix Street

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

USA 15222

Dear Mr. Jordan:

When I began reading Simon Wiesenthal in late 1994, I was naive enough to imagine

that my discovery that he had a credibility problem was an original one. Since that

time, however, I have learned that Mr. Wiesenthal's lack of credibility is widely known

and openly acknowledged. For example, on April 28, 1996, I received a letter from a

Jewish faculty member at an American University, from which I quote the following:

I do not doubt for a moment ... that Simon Wiesenthal is a fabulist

which is the fancy literary word for an unmitigated liar. My father

(an Auschwitz inmate) told me many terrible stories about Wiesenthal's

role after the war in the Austrian DP camps. Wiesenthal is of the same

ilk as Elie Wiesel: a secular saint, he can make the most absurd claims

without fear of exposure.

Now the question that I would like to add to the ones that I have already addressed

to you is the following: How did it come to pass that in 1994 a reputable investigative

journalism show featured as its star witness someone who is widely known to be – shall

we say – a "fabulist"?

And from this question springs a second one: How does it come to pass today that a

reputable investigative journalism show, having learned that it has been victimized by

a "fabulist," refuses to take any corrective action?

Yours truly,

Lubomyr Prytulak

cc: Ed Bradley, Steve Kroft, Morley Safer, Lesley Stahl, Mike Wallace, Simon Wiesenthal

HOME DISINFORMATION PEOPLE JORDAN 1763 hits since 23May98

Bleich Letter 8 23May98 Please substantiate or retract

If your 60 Minutes testimony concerning violent attacks on Jews by Ukrainians and

motivated by anti-Semitism is true, then it behooves you to substantiate it and in so doing

to remove the doubt which surrounds it. If your 60 Minutes testimony is false, then it

behooves you to retract it. Either option will constitute a step toward restoring your

standing in the eyes of the Ukrainian community, and in ameliorating Ukrainian-Jewish

relations.

Silence is an option only if you are prepared to encourage the conclusion that you spoke

impulsively and irresponsibly, and that you subsequently lacked the courage and integrity

to admit your error.

May 23, 1998

Rabbi Yaakov Dov Bleich

29 Shchekavytska Street

Kiev 254071

Ukraine

Dear Rabbi Bleich:

In your appearance on the 60 Minutes broadcast "The Ugly Face of Freedom" of 23

October 1994, you offered some startling testimony concerning the existence of

anti-Semitism in contemporary Ukraine. In your own words:

There have been a number of physical attacks. In a small town, two

elderly Jews were attacked at knifepoint and stabbed because they are

Jews and because of the myth that all Jews must have money hidden in

their homes. The same thing was in west Ukraine, the Carpathian

region. These are very, very frightening facts, because it's – again

that stereotype that we mentioned before, when that leads someone to

really – to – to stab an older couple and leave them helpless, and

you know? – they left them for dead. That means that we have serious

problems.

In the mind of the typical 60 Minutes viewer, your statement would constitute a

substantial proportion of the Ugly Face of Freedom's evidence for the existence of

anti-Semitism in today's Ukraine, and the only evidence at all for the eruption of this

anti-Semitism into violence.

However, I cannot help noticing that your statement is devoid of detail. You do

not disclose the names of the victims, nor the places and dates of the attacks. Nor do

you indicate the source of your information – did you hear about these attacks on the

radio, see them on television, read about them in the newspapers, receive personal

communication, or what? This lack of detail is particularly troubling in view of four

considerations:

(1) that your non-specific testimony occurred in the middle of a broadcast which

was dominated by misrepresentation and disinformation;

(2) that it came from the mouth of an individual recognized in the Ukrainian

community for holding anti-Ukrainian views, and for spreading anti-Ukrainian hatred, as

I think I have demonstrated in my seven previous letters to you of 6Jan95, 26Sep97,

27Sep97, 28Sep97, 29Sep97, 29Sep97, and 30Sep97, in which letters are discussed such

issues as that of your reciting every Saturday in the capital city of Ukraine the

Khmelnytsky curse;

(3) that Jewish interests have sometimes employed exaggerated, or wholly-imagined,

or even self-inflicted anti-Semitic acts to achieve such aims as heightened group

cohesion or increased emigration to Israel; and

(4) that Jewish groups in Ukraine who monitor anti-Semitic incidents report being

unaware of the two attacks that you describe.

Specifically with respect to point (4) above, an open letter to Morley Safer and

the 60 Minutes staff from I. M. Levitas, Head of the Jewish Council of Ukraine as well

as of the Nationalities Associations of Ukraine, as published in the Lviv newspaper Za

Vilnu Ukrainu (For a Free Ukraine) on December 2, 1994, included the following

observations, which I translate from the original Ukrainian. In the portion of the

letter that I quote below, Mr. Levitas argues that the attacks you describe may have

been simple robberies devoid of anti-Semitism. More importantly, Mr. Levitas provides

us with reason to wonder whether the attacks occurred at all:

You reported that two Jews were robbed and beaten. This might have

happened, but most likely not because they were Jews. I imagine that

in Lviv, Ukrainians are also robbed (and significantly more often!),

and yet nobody draws from this the sort of conclusions concerning

ethnic hostility that you draw from the robbing of these two Jews.

Our Jewish Council constantly receives news concerning Jews in

Ukraine, but during the past five years, we have received not a single

report of anyone being beaten because he was a Jew. However, it must

be admitted that such a thing may have occurred without it coming to

our attention – there are plenty of miscreants in every country.

The above speculations lead us once again to the questions of whether your

orientation toward the Ukrainian state is supportive or destructive, responsible or

irresponsible, restrained by reason or fired by emotion. A step toward answering such

questions would be taken by your responding to the points below:

(1) Would you be able to provide the names of the two sets of Jewish victims that

you alluded to (that is, the victims of the knife attack, and the similar victims in the

"Carpathian region"), and the places and dates of the attacks? If by "a number of

attacks" you mean more than two, I would appreciate receiving such documentation for the

other attacks as well. If in addition you are in possession of corroborative evidence

such as videotapes, newspaper clippings, or letters, I would appreciate receiving copies

of these as well.

(2) If the attacks did occur, then there follows the question of what motivated

them. Mr. Levitas suggests that if the knife attack occurred, then it was more likely

driven by economic motives than anti-Semitic ones. You, on the other hand offer that

the attack occurred "because they are Jews," and "because of the myth that all Jews must

have money hidden in their homes," and because "it's – again that stereotype." But for

you to know that the motivation was predominantly anti-Semitic, the perpetrators of the

attacks must have been caught and must have confessed and disclosed their motivation,

unless there exists some alternative evidence pointing to the same conclusion. In any

case, whatever the nature of the material that you relied upon to conclude that the two

attacks had been motivated by anti-Semitism, I wonder if you would be able to provide me

with a copy of it.

(3) I myself was unaware of any Ukrainian "myth that all Jews must have money

hidden in their homes." This strikes me not so much as a myth believed by Ukrainians

about Jews, as a myth believed by yourself about Ukrainians. I wonder if you could

inform me of what evidence you have that Ukrainians are so primitive in their thinking

as to entertain the fantastic myth that "all Jews must have money hidden in their

homes."

If your 60 Minutes testimony concerning violent attacks on Jews by Ukrainians and

motivated by anti-Semitism is true, then it behooves you to substantiate it and in so

doing to remove the doubt which surrounds it. If your 60 Minutes testimony is false,

then it behooves you to retract it. Either option will constitute a step toward

restoring your standing in the eyes of the Ukrainian community, and in ameliorating

Ukrainian-Jewish relations.

Silence is an option only if you are prepared to encourage the conclusion that you

spoke impulsively and irresponsibly, and that you subsequently lacked the courage and

integrity to admit your error.

Yours truly,

Lubomyr Prytulak

cc: Ed Bradley, Jeffrey Fager, Don Hewitt, Steve Kroft, Andy Rooney, Morley Safer,

Lesley Stahl, Mike Wallace.

HOME DISINFORMATION PEOPLE SAFER Safer > 815 hits since 24May98

Morely Safer Letter 1 28Dec94 Please explain silence

December 28, 1994

Morley Safer

51 W 52nd Street

New York, NY

USA 10019

Dear Mr. Safer:

I have been wondering which of the following three reasons best explains why 60 Minutes has not yet broadcast a

correction, a retraction, and an apology for "The Ugly Face of Freedom":

(1) The amount of disinformation in the broadcast was so large that a considerable amount of research and

introspection are necessary before a full and just response can be formulated – but one will soon be forthcoming.

(2) 60 Minutes' researchers and consultants have concluded that none of the objections to the broadcast are

valid, and a full rebuttal of these objections will shortly be made available.

(3) Whether the Ukrainian objections are right or wrong is irrelevant what is relevant is that CBS views

Ukrainians as too weak to force CBS to suffer any loss of face.

As time passes with no response from 60 Minutes, Ukrainians are increasingly pulled toward the third of these as

the correct explanation.

Yours truly,

Lubomyr Prytulak

HOME DISINFORMATION PEOPLE SAFER 669 hits since 24May98

Morely Safer Letter 2 19Mar96 Contempt for the viewer

March 19, 1996

Morley Safer

60 Minutes, CBS Television

51 W 52nd Street

New York, NY

USA 10019

Dear Mr. Safer:

I have been resisting occasional impulses to expand and amplify "The Ugly Face of 60 Minutes," which as you know

is my December 1994 critique of 60 Minutes broadcast "The Ugly Face of Freedom" – as it presently stands, this

critique covers the main points adequately, and I do not have time to polish it. Occasionally, however, some defect

or other of the 60 Minutes broadcast presents itself from a new angle, and I find myself wondering if adding a

description of this freshly-viewed defect to my critique would not strengthen it. For example, just now I thought of

adding:

Mr. Safer tells us of the Lviv reunion of Galicia Division veterans that "Nowhere, not even

in Germany, are the SS so openly celebrated," and yet does not pause to explain how it can be

that in this most open of all celebrations of the SS, not a single portrait of Hitler can be

seen, not a single hand is raised in a Heil Hitler salute, no Nazi marching songs are being sung

or played, no Nazi speeches are recorded, not a single swastika is anywhere on display – not even

a single "SS" can be discovered anywhere among the many medals and insignia worn by the

veterans. So devoid is this reunion of any of the signs that one might expect in any open

celebration of the SS that one wonders what led Mr. Safer to the conclusion that that is what it

was. Perhaps it is the case that Mr. Safer was so carried away by his enthusiasm for the

feelings that he was sharing with 60 Minutes viewers that he quite overlooked the absence of

corroborative evidence. But if so, then is it not the case that he was taking another step

toward turning a broadcast that purported to be one of investigative journalism into an Oprah

Winfrey-style I-bare-my-secret-emotions-to-all-fest, with the secret emotions bared being those

of the correspondent himself?

What do you think? – Would this paragraph be worth adding or not? Perhaps it is too strong, and would only

weaken the critique? On the other hand, how else to get CBS to retract and to winnow its staff of offending personnel

than by stating the defects of "The Ugly Face of Freedom" boldly?

Yours truly,

Lubomyr Prytulak

cc: Ed Bradley, Steve Kroft, Michael Jordan, Lesley Stahl, Mike Wallace.

Morley Safer Letter 3 24May98 Your name inevitably comes up

If you cannot find instances of unfairness or inaccuracy in the many accusations that

have been leveled against The Ugly Face of Freedom, then I wonder whether your

refusing to retract and apologize satisfies standards of journalistic ethics.

May 24, 1998

Morley Safer

60 Minutes, CBS Television

51 W 52nd Street

New York, NY

USA 10019

Dear Mr. Safer:

I am enclosing a copy of my letter to Rabbi Yaakov Dov Bleich dated 23May98

asking him to corroborate or to retract certain of his statements broadcast on the 60

Minutes story The Ugly Face of Freedom of 23Oct94. The subject of that letter leads

to further questions that I would like to put to you.

As your broadcast The Ugly Face of Freedom was devoid of evidence supporting the

extreme conclusions that you were offering, and as the documentation of the two

attacks on Jews that Rabbi Bleich describes would have begun to provide some such

missing evidence, why did you not get in touch with the two sets of victims, as well

as with law enforcement officials, and interview them for the 60 Minutes broadcast?

In the case of the knife attack on two elderly Jews, Rabbi Bleich describes the

victims as having been left "for dead." Thus, the severity of this attack possibly

resulted in the taking of police and medical photographs, and possibly resulted in

newspaper coverage, and these photographs and newspaper stories, together with any

on-camera testimony of the victims and police officials would have begun to add

substantiation to your broadcast. In fact, if the perpetrators of any of the attacks

had been apprehended, you might have been able to interview them as well. Any of

these steps would have done much to enhance the quality of your work and yet you

seem to have failed to take any of these elementary and obvious steps. I wonder if

you could explain why.

The suspicion that you would be attempting to refute in your answer is that you

did indeed take the obvious steps of attempting to interview the victims and

attempting to confirm the stories with law enforcement officials, discovered that the

stories did not pan out, but finding yourself thin on material, broadcast Rabbi

Bleich's allusions to them anyway.

You will see that in my letter to Rabbi Bleich, I request particulars concerning

the two or more attacks that he refers to. I now put the same request to you: if you

are able to provide confirmatory details, please do so – at a minimum, the names of

the victims, and the locations and dates of the attacks; copies of newspaper

clippings or other documentation if you have it. If you are unable to document Rabbi

Bleich's stories, then it would seem appropriate that you retract them.

A comment on a related point. You must be aware that a number of the defects of

the 60 Minutes broadcast The Ugly Face of Freedom are discussed on the Ukrainian

Archive web site, particularly in the section at www.ukar.org/60min.shtml, and to a

lesser extent in other places on the larger site at www.ukar.org. Your name

inevitably comes up in these discussions. Using the site's internal search engine to

search for your name reveals that it appears hundreds of times spread over dozens of

documents. I mention this to invite you to examine these many references with the

aim of determining their accuracy and fairness. If you have any comments to make

concerning these references, then I can promise you that these comments will be

reproduced on the Ukrainian Archive complete and unedited, and that any instances of

unfairness or inaccuracy that you bring to my attention will be immediately

corrected.

If you cannot find instances of unfairness or inaccuracy in the many accusations

that have been leveled against The Ugly Face of Freedom, then I wonder whether your

refusing to retract and apologize satisfies standards of journalistic ethics.

Yours truly,

Lubomyr Prytulak

cc: Ed Bradley, Jeffrey Fager, Don Hewitt, Steve Kroft, Andy Rooney, Lesley Stahl,

Mike Wallace.

HOME DISINFORMATION PEOPLE SAFER 626 hits since 5Dec98

Morely Safer Letter 4 5Dec98 Press responsibility and accountability

The fairness doctrine, which included the equal-time provision, was scrapped under

Reagan. Television news programs are under no obligation to present all sides of an

issue.

December 5, 1998

Morley Safer

60 Minutes, CBS Television

51 W 52nd Street

New York, NY

USA 10019

Dear Mr. Safer:

The passage below from Michael Crichton's novel Airframe draws a picture of

American television news as irresponsible and lacking accountability:

Edward Fuller was the head of Norton Legal. He was a thin, ungainly

man of forty. He sat uneasily in the chair in Marder's office.

"Edward," Marder said, "we have a problem. Newsline is going to

run a story on the N-22 this weekend on prime-time television, and it

is going to be highly unfavorable."

"How unfavorable?"

"They're calling the N-22 a deathtrap."

"Oh dear," Fuller said. "That's very unfortunate."

"Yes, it is," Marder said. "I brought you in because I want to

know what I can do about it."

"Do about it?" Fuller said, frowning.

"Yes," Marder said. "What can we do? Can we prevent them from

running the story?"

"No."

"Can we get a court injunction barring them?"

"No. That's prior restraint. And from a publicity standpoint,

it's ill advised."

"You mean it would look bad."

"An attempt to muzzle the press? Violate the First Amendment?

That would suggest you have something to hide."

"In other words," Marder said, "they can run the story, and we

are powerless to stop them."

"Yes."

"Okay. But I think Newsline's information is inaccurate and

biased. Can we demand they give equal time to our evidence?"

"No," Fuller said. "The fairness doctrine, which included the

equal-time provision, was scrapped under Reagan. Television news

programs are under no obligation to present all sides of an issue."

"So they can say anything they want? No matter how unbalanced?"

"That's right."

"That doesn't seem proper."

"It's the law," Fuller said, with a shrug.

"Okay," Marder said. "Now this program is going to air at a very

sensitive moment for our company. Adverse publicity may very well

cost us the China sale."

"Yes, it might."

"Suppose that we lost business as a result of their show. If we

can demonstrate that Newsline presented an erroneous view – and we

told them it was erroneous – can we sue them for damages?"

"As a practical matter, no. We would probably have to show they